The Ideological re-writing of the Second Vatican Council and Fundamental Misinterpre

  • Thread starter Thread starter bones_IV
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bones_IV

Guest
The left-wing ideologues congrolled the liturgical agenda after the Council and their minions, ilke Father Martin, are still running around in the Media with their asinine distortions. And at it again as usual. Yes, the Reform of the Reform has finally begun. And the people who snatched the rug out from everyone else 40 years ago are now whining that people have noticed what they pushed ISN’T what Vatican II said!! 'm always amazed that the only line that the liberal/heterodox person can quote from Vatican II is ‘in full conscious and active participation’ (which they claim was the ‘the goal of the Council.’) and never seem to quote ANY of the rest of it - you know like
‘The use of the Latin language, with due respect to particular law, is to be preserved in the Latin rites.’ (SC 36) or ‘The Church recognizes Gregorian chant as being specially suited to the Roman liturgy. Therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical servcies.’ (SC 116) Or ‘Therefore no other person, NOT EVEN A PRIEST, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.’ (SC22).

Gee - sort of reminds you of Protestants - proof texting with Bible verses - except our Protestant brothers and sisters have many more verses and have read the entire document (Bible) and typically truly want to know the truth. Wish the same could be said for those running around the sanctuary and are part of the 3 Ring Circus Effect during Mass.

thenewliturgicalmovement.blogspot.com/2006/10/ideological-re-writing-of-second.html
 
Not a “Vatican II Bashing Thread”.

Please do not “hijack” the thread the same way as those people who today continue to missinterpret and destroy the truth of Vatican Council II.

Ken
 
Or it could be that Vatican II has been interpreted by the liberals just the way it was meant to be interpreted.

Doesn’t say much for a Council when it can be “distorted” and “misinterpreted” so easily and for so long. Now does it? Hmmmm???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top